Maybe the "buzzy-ness" goes along with Nissan's philosophy of building sportier vehicles.
 
On another note, i have to say that i'd prefer the former grill. It had a "get outta the way" persona to it. Next time, you should put a couple interior pictures up when giving a update!

The problem I have (visually) with this truck is the HUMP in the middle of it.
 
I know that the curved roof line is used in the Infinity ads, but look at the windows. They curve back to the C Piller and then ...... nothing.
 
It looks like a pregnant bug with a backpack.

I like the styling—and welcome the "hump" in the profile. Where is it written that the side windows have to go in a straight line from the A-pillar to the rear of the vehicle?
 
I think Nissan did an excellent job with the overall looks of this SUV.

brett8210
 
I second your "pregnant bug with a backpack" comment.

I like the looks of the Armada, even the hump back, it's unique. And I dig the new grille using less chrome. Ironically, it now resembles the Pathfinder more than the "Pathfinder Armada" ever did. I don't much care for the Infiniti version, but I wouldn't spend that much anyway. We test drove an Armada before we bought our Yukon XL a couple of years ago, and really liked the way it drove. Very responsive engine, and the ride was nice and firm. The third row was actually quite roomy. But the interior seemed cheap, and there were major reliabilty issues at the time. I understand those have been addressed and recent years are quite trustworthy.
 
And this is yet another three row SUV with inadequate cargo space behind that third row. Not near as much as in the minivan we came out of. I'd probably prefer something smaller like the Pathfinder or Explorer if I only needed the third row occasionally.

+1 Brett! That hump is a complete put-off for me. I hate this car as far as exterior styling go.
 
Karl, apart from the styling, the Armada might actually be the full-size SUV for me. For me, the "buziness" and not-bad-but-not-great ride are part of the wholesome driving experience......and I'm sure I'd like it! Well, I should test-drive any recent Nissans......

Further, WHY does Nissan feel the need to hide the door handles in the back two doors?
 
I understood it in the first generation Pathfinder. They wanted it to look just like the two door. But they don't even make the two door anymore. I think I would like it if they made both sets of handles hidden in the pillars but to have one set by "hide" the other seems silly.

I'm with you guys - whose bright idea was it for that lump in the middle of the vehicle?
 
My favorite in this segment is the GMC Yukon. For the first time ever, it actually looks different from the Tahoe.

Nissan/Infiniti could use a heavy dose of refinement in all their products.

>>> Maybe the "buzzy-ness" goes along with Nissan's philosophy of building sportier vehicles.
 
Nissan does not build sportier vehicles. They just try to give the impression that their vehicles are sporty, just like Pontiac. If you want sporty Japanese vehicles, check out Mazdas.
 
>>>But the interior seemed cheap, and there were major reliabilty issues at the time. I understand those have been addressed and recent years are quite trustworthy.
 
Yeah, they have been addressed so well that Nissan is seriously thinking about killing the Titan; the story is on the Inside line web page.
 
Nissan's quality control is the lowest of all Japanese brands, and good old Carlos Ghosn himself said in a press conference that every single part on the Titan and Armada was engineered to last 5 and only 5 years. Nissan used to be nearly the equal of Toyota and Honda, but sadly they are not anymore.

Great info, tech! What are Nissan thinking, engineering cars for only 5 years? That's atrocious! Together with their expensive option packages, another reason not to buy a Nissan.
 
I remember when I was growing up in the '80s in West Africa, Nissan and Toyota were the highly regarded Japanese brands. Just about all light-duty commercial vehicles were Nissans and Toyotas; Nissan (Datsun at the time) had an especially great reputation of withstanding abuse for year in year out! Nobody even considered a Honda.....Honda was the motorbike company.

"Carlos Ghosn himself said in a press conference that every single part on the Titan and Armada was engineered to last 5 and only 5 years."
 
That is just depressing.

I'd like a source for that 5 year quote. to me it reaks of urban legend.
 
---
 
edit.
 
in fact doig some searching using google. I found nothing that even remotly points to a statement like that. And it would have been big news. So i'm calling FUD on that statement by that poster.
 
And FYI, theres no way to engineer a part to last 5 years, and only 5 years.
 
theres no 'year' factor in product life.

opfreak: Ghosn made that statement at a press event where at door handle broke off of a brand new Titan. It was widely reported in the automotive press at the time and Autoweek ran several stories about his statement.
 
Every product you buy, car or otherwise, is engineered to last either a set amount of time, or other measurable factor. Asian cars are all engineered to last a set number of years, American cars for a set number of miles. Chrysler products are built for 100,000 miles, Ford also makes cars to last 100K, but their trucks are made to last 250,000 miles. GM has never had a set mileage for all their vehicles, it has varied from car to car. Entry level Japanese cars, like Yaris and Fit, are 3-5 year cars. Civics, Corollas, Accords, Subarus, and all Lexus models are 10 year cars. Before their acquisition by Renault, Nissan built 5 and 10 year cars, now all Nissans and Infinitis are 5 year cars, which is a damn shame, because they do have some very well designed models, but their built in expiration dates comes much sooner than the competition.
 
If you cannot believe that modern engineering cannot predict the expected life span of any manufactured product, then you are deluding yourself. But it does not mean that every Nissan will fall apart in exactly 5 years. What it means is that 90-95% of the engineered components should last five years without catastrophic failure. But there are thousands of components in a car, and chances are that something will fail. If you want examples that have become common knowledge, look at the expected lifetimes of Ford Taurus transmissions, or how when the Escort turned into a rebadged Mazda Protege in '93, they life expectancy of the car doubled.

technetium99 I googled and googled, and could not find it. maybe it happened maybe it didn't.
 
I know about product cycles, learned about it in engineering classes. Things are speced out in terms of cycles, number of times something is predicated to happen, times a correction factor, and general a safety margin, or error margin.
 
So to say that the car will last 5 years is an absurd statment. and almost baseless in terms of engineering. If the truck was targeting for a '5 year life'. That 5 years is very meaning less. 100,000 miles might be a target. But then again, for the truck to last 100,000 miles your target would not be 100,000 miles. in fact your median failure rate wouldn't even be near 100,000 miles.
 
Unless they really wanted to shot them selves in the foot. if the did design trucks so blindly as you state, a majorty of them would be dieing by the 5th year.
 
When I'm geussing from an engineering background, the true target life would be more so around 250,000 miles.
 
I doubt now in days any car maker does what you state, because we would see failure rates like cars had in the 60,70, and some of the 80's